A case of slander?

bigneacy

Having a discussion with our (soon-to-be-ex) Landlord. We told her we would like them to keep our security deposit as our final months rent. (I know this isn't totally legal, but we've heard from sources that she's not one for giving deposits back)

We told her that we've heard she has a reputation locally for not giving deposits back and we didn't want to be another one of these cases.

She got defensive (as you would) and her and her husband started questioning where we heard this (it was from an estate agent who rented the house out for her twice previously), but we weren't going to tell her that.

The husband said it was a serious accusation to make and he would "back me into a corner" and make me tell them where I heard it from.

He told me we would hear from them tommorow about it. What situation are we in here? We were just repeating information about them, back to them. Are we exposed to getting done for slander or what can they do?

I'm not looking for legal advice, just clarification of our current position and maybe a clarification of the law surrounding slander

NoQuarter

There is no such thing as slander in Irish law anymore, it is replaced by the tort of defamation now and you havent defamed anyone on your facts.

The guy who told you, the estate agent, he has defamed the landlord IF and only IF what he said is untrue.

You have nothing to worry about.

coylemj

They can do nothing about something said in private with no third parties about, that's assuming that the 'we' that you're referring to is you and your co-tenant or spouse.

bigneacy

NoQuarter wrote: »

There is no such thing as slander in Irish law anymore, it is replaced by the tort of defamation now and you havent defamed anyone on your facts.

The guy who told you, the estate agent, he has defamed the landlord IF and only IF what he said is untrue.

You have nothing to worry about.

Cool... And can they make me name my source? My source is genuine, but i'd rather not put him in the position.

bigneacy

coylemj wrote: »

They can do nothing about something said in private with no third parties about, that's assuming that the 'we' that you're referring to is you and your co-tenant or spouse.

Yes, correct... me and my spouse only.

coylemj

Even if a third party was listening, you also have the defence of 'honest opinion'....

Defamation Act 2009.

20.— (1) It shall be a defence (to be known, and in this section referred to, as the “defence of honest opinion”) to a defamation action for the defendant to prove that, in the case of a statement consisting of an opinion, the opinion was honestly held.

http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/2009/en/act/pub/0031/sec0020.html#sec20

Plazaman

bigneacy wrote: »

We told her that we've heard she has a reputation locally for not giving deposits back and we didn't want to be another one of these cases.

How long were you a tenant and why did you feel you were comfortable to say that to your landlord?

Regardless if there's room for backtracking (i.e. they weren't talking about you etc) I'd try it. If someone told you that you had a reputation locally would you not get defensive?

The worst is you have insulted them by proxy, there's no case for slander as it's 3rd hand and not published or said loudly in public that would tarnish them

bigneacy

Plazaman wrote: »

How long were you a tenant and why did you feel you were comfortable to say that to your landlord?

Regardless if there's room for backtracking (i.e. they weren't talking about you etc) I'd try it. If someone told you that you had a reputation locally would you not get defensive?

The worst is you have insulted them by proxy, there's no case for slander as it's 3rd hand and not published or said loudly in public that would tarnish them

Not long, to be honest it was a comment said in the heat of the argument and one I would take back if I could, but its the truth and she knows it. Shes upset because she is now aware that people know.

She has a right to take offence but nothing I said was untrue and regardless she said far worse to us in the course of the argument and is a very unkind and mean spirited person to begin with.

coylemj

Plazaman wrote: »

How long were you a tenant and why did you feel you were comfortable to say that to your landlord?

What has the length of their tenancy got to do with it?

Plazaman wrote: »

why did you feel you were comfortable to say that to your landlord?

Because they don't want to be left owed money by a landlord who has a reputation for hanging on to tenant's deposits.

Plazaman wrote: »

Regardless if there's room for backtracking (i.e. they weren't talking about you etc) I'd try it. If someone told you that you had a reputation locally would you not get defensive?

Anyone would get defensive but in this case the reputation seems to be well deserved if a local estate agent who has previously been engaged by the landlord is saying what he did behind the landlord's back.

Why should the OP backtrack?

Plazaman wrote: »

The worst is you have insulted them by proxy

They haven't insulted them by proxy, they have insulted them direct to their faces and it sounds like the landlord needed someone with balls to tell them what was said.

Plazaman wrote: »

there's no case for slander as it's 3rd hand and not published or said loudly in public that would tarnish them

There is no defence of saying something which is 3rd hand. The OP said what he did, believing it to be true but all of that is irrelevant because there was nobody else about so they have nothing to worry about in relation to the landlord's empty threats.

Plazaman

bigneacy wrote: »

Not long, to be honest it was a comment said in the heat of the argument and one I would take back if I could, but its the truth and she knows it. Shes upset because she is now aware that people know.

She has a right to take offence but nothing I said was untrue and regardless she said far worse to us in the course of the argument and is a very unkind and mean spirited person to begin with.

Absolutely, obviously there were other issues with this landlord that brought about the arguement, didn't read from in the first post and just thought ye mentioned it in passing conversation which negates a lot of my first thoughts MJ.

Still, no case for slander but if they are problem landlord(s) you might have to contact the PRTB but it would mean paying the final month.

Best of luck, update us.

Marcusm

bigneacy wrote: »

The husband said it was a serious accusation to make and he would "back me into a corner" and make me tell them where I heard it from.

He told me we would hear from them tommorow about it. What situation are we in here? We were just repeating information about them, back to them. Are we exposed to getting done for slander or what can they do?
slander

I can't believe that you could have defamed them; however, if the husband put you under fear of violence, that in itself may constitute an assault!

AnnaThe

Well, if you are worried about being taken to court it will cost them about €10,000 to get a case to the steps of the courthouse and seeing as they keep deposits they are unlikely to give that kind of money to a solicitor and a barrister.

NUTLEY BOY

Briefly, I don't share the optimistic opinions given to the OP.

1. The statement was libellous in it's essential character. Therefore, an actual libel can be inferred from it.

2. The words were spoken in front of OP's spouse. That certainly constitutes publication to a third party. Indeed, OP's spouse would be a compellable witness for the landlady if she sued !

3. Whether the words are libellous or not is a matter of fact to be decided by a judge (Circuit Court) or a jury (High Court).

4. The landlady's husband cannot compel OP to reveal the source no matter what he threatens as that is a matter of evidence to be adduced in court.

5. Generally, you cannot utter a statement that is libellous in character and then go on a retrospective mission to find evidence to back it up. See Loutchansky -v- Times Newspapers and similar cases. In simple terms you need to have possession of your facts before you "publish" if you are going to argue justification or truth.

6. The best hope here is that the landlady will not sue if she is dodgy for fear of drawing attention to herself and her practices and the risks that would attach to initiating such a case.

coylemj

NUTLEY BOY wrote: »

2. The words were spoken in front of OP's spouse. That certainly constitutes publication to a third party. Indeed, OP's spouse would be a compellable witness for the landlady if she sued !

Isn't there absolute privilege attaching to a communication between a husband and wife such that the wife cannot be considered a 'third party' in any action of this type?

The husband cannot defame a third party by saying something in private to his wife so how can he defame a third party by saying something to that third party in the presence of his wife?

NUTLEY BOY

I have read OP to mean that the remark was made to the landlady in the presence of the OP's spouse.

I'm not a practising lawyer, so the following is in no way to be construed as legal advice.

I find that the best approach when someone says "defamation" (or something to that effect) is the little-used tactic of filing a motion of cessatio stercus tauri. This is a legal device used in the preliminary stage of any difference of opinion concerning potential defamation. You don't have to complete any documents or submit anything to a court - a motion of cessatio stercus tauri is delivered verbally to the other party (note 1). It's a pity in a way that people who have quasi-legal disputes don't use this as much as they should, and it's even more regrettable that the more ancient (and indeed colourful) name of the procedure - opinio obstructum recti interdigitatum - has fallen into complete disuse.

As for the landlord's "threats", that's possibly a criminal matter and a long way outside my area of knowledge. However, in some instances where people have actually been backed into corners, they have used patella rapida ad testiculi venit (note 2), though it isn't always successful and not without its risks.

Notes:
(1) Usually at an elevated volume and some distance.

(2) I hasten to point out that I do not in any way condone, advocate or approve of this.

Last latin joke I laughed at was when someone sent me a message saying timeo danaos et dona accipientes about the time of the Greek bailout.

I chuckled again tonight.